click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130216
20130224
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
differently that he didn't do, which was by having them do nothing about the military. clinton and obama and the younger bush. these four individuals made these contributions, it is no surprise that they were in the terrible situation that we find ourselves in now that has to be corrected. when we look at the george herbert walker bush administration, he had three important people at the defense department. it was based on just a tailored pattern of total deception and outright lies. they have put together a secret paper. instead of taking together a strategic opportunity the collapse of the soviet union in 1991, all of those things we didn't expect to see in a lifetime. i certainly didn't expect to see this a couple of us wrote about the problems and no one expected it to collapse like a house of cards. this opportunity you was totally not taken. it was not taken by the bush administration. there were things like the invasion of panama and one individual had been on the cia payroll for most of the time and that is a heck of a precedence to set the terms of the military. it speaks as a m
the sudden they change the topic to something wildly off topic. talking about fiscal clinton subtly you get electron why you hate gay people and not only do you hate gay people but here is a letter signed an stamp from ronald reagan showing that you hate gay people and you have never seen it before and don't know what they're talking about. this is completely random information. what are you saying? the answer to that is not pretend -- the initial reaction is i know what you are talking about. the human response, to the ego, i know what you are talking about, why do we deal with this? i don't know what you're talking about and if you want to talk about it, let me do the research first and we can have an educated debate from the issue. i don't discuss things i don't know about. it take off of the table immediately and if it doesn't take off of the table and they continue to press forward they look like a bully because it is the bullying tactic. you don't ask people to talk about things they don't know about. you don't ask a seventh grader to do calculus unless they are a genius at it and you
for upper-income taxpayers they're going to go back to clinton-era tax rates. but the point in trying to make with this one chart, this is the real world. the idea that tax cuts pay for themselves is not the real world. when one side believes one thing in one side believes the other, there is not much room for consequence. i will come back to white, and they should be part of how you think about this. why is it that the two sides believe such different things? why do one depend on evidence and the other on broad principles about the size of government, individual liberty, and so forth and so on. so let me -- i can do this. of want to go back to that. let me move on to the experience . i am sure -- you all understand, and i think most people agree that the signature issue for the bush of illustration, the ones that had the most consequence and the ones that will shape the bush administration's place in history, that tax cut and the invasion. so you can imagine how difficult these decisions were and with respect before going in a committing all those troops and hundreds of billions of d
're going to go back to clinton era tax rates. but the point i'm trying to make with this one chart is to say, this is the real world, and the idea that tax cuts pay for themselves is not the real world. and when one side believes one thing and one side believes the other, there's not much room for consequence. i will come back to why and this should be part of how you think about this stuff. why is it that the two sides believe such different things? why does one depend on defend -- evidence and the other on broad principles about the size of government individual accomplish so forth and so on. so let me -- i want to go back to that. and let me move on to the experience with iraq. i'm sure you all understand -- and i think most people would agree -- the signature issues for the bush administration, the ones that had the most consequence and the ones that will shape the bush administration's place in history -- were, one, the tax cuts, and, two, the invasion of iraq. so you can imagine how difficult these decisions were, and with respect to iraq, before going in and committing all t
proper income tax payers, they're going to go back to the clinton era tax relief. the point i am trying to make with this one chart, this is the real world and the idea tax cuts favored themselves is not the real world and when one side believes one thing and one side believes the other there's not much room for a consequence. i will come back to why and this should be how you think about this one. why is it that the two sides believed such different things? why does one depend on evidence and the other depend more on broad principles about the size of government and individual liberty and so forth and so on? let me if i can do this, let me go back and let me move on to the experience with iraq. you all understand most people would agree the signature issue for the bush administration, the one that had the most consequence and the ones that will shape the bush administration's place in history, tax cuts and invasion of iraq. you can imagine how difficult these decisions were and with respect to iraq before going in and giving hundreds of billions of dollars you can imagine it took a lot
in policy and ran successfully? >> bill clinton is the most obvious. he writes out in the 16th year he decided it is an amazing experience because people are so interested to make a difference and me involved it is the most unfortunate experience but is exhilarating to not to want to do it again. >> host: tallis about your experience. where were you? what was the primary? >> guest: 2006 democratic primary road violence second congressional district the incumbent had was there for a while and prior to that was secretary of state and he is still in congress. the main reason iran is i felt he is not representing the district on the issues and that was important we were two-thirds pro-choice and voted 27 times against that. also we authorizing a egregious provisions of the pager fact, he was not very outspoken about the of war in iraq and i thought people of rhode island were not being represented by it rarely does the establishment feel the candidate can go against someone so i felt i had to do it. i have just written by a first book so i was very aware of the limitations and because i wa
they didn't support the surge in iraq, get after hillary clinton. she voted against the surge. get after barack obama, he voted against the surge. get after the entire joint chiefs of staff at the time. they were all against the surge. and you can make the case that the surge worked in a tactical way. it still hasn't worked in its ultimate, strategic objectives for reasons that i discussed, and in the meantime, it did cost a lot of money and probably, you know, a thousand extra american soldiers died in the implementation of that surge compared with if you just pulled them out. was that worth it? i don't know. i don't know. we don't know yet. but it's not, it is not a clear-cut fact that the surge worked and we won and that sort of thing. as for the jewish lobby question, i mean, you know, let's get real. the israeli press, i mean, i'm jewish. the israeli press refers to aipac as the jewish lobby. okay, it's a little -- and, you know, aipac has had this thing going for years where anybody who criticizes israel, they say, oh, well, you're anti-semitic. you're really talking about jews, yo
with the internet. when bill clinton and i went into the white house in 1993, there were 50 sites on the worldwide web. now there's a trillion of them. look at what happened to newspaper all over the world. dallas part of -- that's part of the breakdown of the old pattern, but now we have facebook, twitter, and it keeps going. i spent time in silicon valley, and there's 20 # new companies out there that reached a ball dollar evaluation just in the last year and a half. our world is changing dramatically, some of the old is breaking down, and fading away and dispating, but the new patterns are quite complex and challenging and they bring a lot of changes. these six drivers of global change are all emergent changes. they have been building up for awhile, and now they are all kind of happening statement. let's take them one by one. number one, chapter one. earth inc, a new interconnected, global economy that operates as if it is a single entity. we've been seeing the outsourcing of jobs, and we've been seeing the connection of the supply side, and now we have virtual factories with supply lines runni
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8